I definitely won't minimize the quality knowing the quality or rF2 and how I enjoy it and would probably handle great, and have good graphics and the tracks will be top notch ass it can be seen in all the trailers. Also I know that i'm part of a minority related to VR and the only hopes is to be vocal; and yes, actually I don't have hopes or hyped for whatever comes out; I just wait and see if has what I like or not when launched. and in my case yes I wont buy any other piece of sim game if does not implement VR no matter how good is it. If the sim tick my boxes (nice physics, offline play, good Ai and VR) then i'll buy it when it came out else i'll give it a pass.
given that is Studio397 building the sim, using rFactor 2 engine... thost two points are given for granted... also I was given VR for granted. Now is wait and see.
Hi redapg, and I'm starting to find it strange when it becomes very easy, as it seems from the video to play with a gamepad..., this is no criticism of your post.
ACC doesn't even need to be calibrated, it's already fine, when I played during the free time on Steam I didn't even put a steering wheel, rFactor2 is possible to play with a controller, however if it's already adapted in such a way it's clear that it will be easier, but I believe that I won't buy it, so I don't care, some people get angry if someone says that.
Unless you're like top 2% alien level, I guarantee a number of people (including one of the devs, whose name has 'Dev' in it) can beat you with a gamepad in rF2. Don't worry about it.
I really hope it stays on current engine if they take it to a newer dx12 based engine the rippers will screwed, current engine car and track assets can still NR ripped even from protected content, meaning even if they wont officially backport new tracks, the modders will add them back to rf2 for us anyhow.
But the used Controller has nothing to do with the Position of the Driver View, so i was wondering why you quoted my Post.
read the latest RF2 article on RD, its is claimed a leak from within MSG staff says the models are not backwards compatible from LMU to RF2 due to the changes in engine. All im saying is I hope thats not true. For Rf2 anyhow.. View attachment upload_2024-1-21_6-52-55.png
Shame, but not that surprising unfortunately. There is a trend in the industry to move towards standard engines, which is why probably over half of the new games released today use Unreal Engine. rF2 graphics engine has its issues like inconsistent performance from run to run and large overhead on the PCIe bus that I often complained about, but it got a lot better after the DX11 rewrite.
Content is whatever... but features aren't. I hope for physics improvements to come to rF2 eventually. Of course proper full clutch simulation is not expected to come after LMU LOL Anyway... I don't see how it would be impossible to transfer content due some engine differences. 3D model is 3D model..
Of course there are incompatible changes - that's what they mean when they talk about not having to worry about existing content. It's not dx12. And saying it's a shame because now people can't rip it back to rF2: in a different forum you'd be banned for that.
Lets see, the two companies MSG & S397, depend upon LMU being a success. They will need every dime they can scratch from LMU. So you think they will make it easy for ports back to rF2? A simple path back to rF2 means fewer sales of LMU and fewer DLC sales in the future. I'm sure there will be guys who can figure it out, but porting back to rF2 kills not only LMU but S397 as well.
As far as I can see from the annual reports, LMU is a joint venture between MSG and ACO. That dates from 2019 so predates MSG's acquisition of S397. It's a ten year deal - that's expected to be from the release date. In theory LMU could have been created by any sim racing design house. However, as the Le Mans Virtual was using rF2 that was the logical choice. So they'll set in motion a design for LMU based around what S397 know. But the two are separate. rF2 is a "general purpose" sim that allows, rather encourages, modding, and anyone can set up a server to hold their own race events. LMU isn't go to be that - well if I was in charge it wouldn't. It needs to be closed to restrict users to buying DLC. Although the core engine is rF2 it will need to be modified to enforce this. It needs to have an online server process that only MSG control. At some point they need to be able to get some revenue from this. Does that sound a bit like another sim? ummm... It also needs to be designed so it can go onto consoles because that's where the big money is. ( It's annoying that ACC users on PCs can't race against console users. ) Perhaps LMU will become the core of rF3 at some point in the future? I'd imagine it wouldn't be too difficult to rebrand LMU as rF3 if required? But what do I know?
Probably going with a different graphics engine allows for easier porting to consoles. rF2 engine is likely very custom at this point as it hasn't been on console during any of its existence and no game studio has ported a gMotor sim to console as far as I know. I hope the physics engine will at least be based on pMotor and nothing else. If it's not, that's when you lose me.
I wouldn't assume (or even guess) that it's using a whole new engine, when someone's quoted on a chat that they know someone that said it's a new engine. There's been no indication from any of the devs, nor from the videos shown, that it's anything but a continuation of the same graphics engine, while taking advantage of being able to tune it specially for the LMU content.
I'm just wondering how many minutes will pass on Feb 20, 2024 until folks start screaming about the Hybrid whine and demand a way to shut it off...
I Totally agreed with you. rf2 is the best but sadly it does not support xinput (can't press brake and gas at the same time)
